Citation Nr: 1016172
Decision Date: 05/03/10 Archive Date: 05/13/10
DOCKET NO. 07-08 746 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Phoenix, Arizona
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of
the United States
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Robert E. O'Brien, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The Veteran had active service from July 1971 to March 1973.
This included time in Vietnam with the Marines.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from an April 2006 rating decision of the
VARO in Phoenix, Arizona, that denied entitlement to the
benefit sought.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The evidence of record reveals a number of psychiatric
diagnoses, including PTSD.
2. The Veteran is shown as likely as not to have PTSD due to
his experiences in Vietnam with the Marines.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for service connection for PTSD are reasonably
met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5102, 5103, 5107 (West 2002 &
Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303 (2009).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
Duties to Notify and Assist.
In light of the allowance of the claim, compliance with the
Veterans Claim Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA) (codified at
38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5106, 5107, 5126
(West 2002 & Supp. 2009)) need not be discussed. The Board
notes that there has been essential compliance with the
mandates of the VCAA throughout the course of the appeal.
Pertinent Legal Criteria.
In general, service connection may be granted for disability
resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by
active military service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110; 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.303.
Regulations also provide that service connection may be
established when all the evidence of record, including that
pertinent to service, demonstrates that the Veteran has a
current disability that was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.303(d).
Service connection for PTSD requires medical evidence
diagnosing the condition in accordance with the provisions of
38 C.F.R. § 4.125(b); a link, established by medical
evidence, between current symptoms and inservice stressors;
and credible supporting evidence that the claimed inservice
stressor actually occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f).
The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
(Court) has held that for service connection to be awarded,
there must be: (1) Medical evidence of a current disability;
(2) medical evidence, or in certain circumstances, lay
evidence of inservice incurrence or aggravation of a disease
or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the
claimed inservice disease or injury and the present disease
or injury. Coburn v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 427, 431
(2006); Disabled American Veterans v. Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, 419 F.3d 1317, 1318 Fed. Cir. 2005); Shedden v.
Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Even if the
Veteran fails to demonstrate any one element, denial of
service connection will result.
Factual Background and Analysis.
The Board notes that it has thoroughly reviewed all the
evidence in the claims folder. Although the Board has an
obligation to provide reasons and bases supporting its
decision, there is no need to discuss in detail all the
evidence submitted by the Veteran or in his behalf. See
Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (the
Board must review the entire record, but does not have to
discuss each piece of evidence). The analysis below focuses
on the most salient and relevant evidence, and on what this
evidence shows, or fails to show, on the claim. The Veteran
should not assume that the Board has overlooked pieces of
evidence that are not explicitly discussed herein. See
Timberlake v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 122 (2000) (the law
requires only that the Board address its reasons for
rejecting evidence favorable to the Veteran).
The available personnel records show that the Veteran
participated in operations with the 1st Marine Air Wing,
Fleet Marine Force, in Vietnam in 1972 and 1973. His primary
duty assignment in Vietnam was as an engineer equipment
mechanic.
A review of the service treatment records discloses that in
January 1973 he was seen at a service department dispensary
at Bien Hoa Air Base for what was reported as evaluation of a
1-inch laceration of the right forearm. Sutures were
applied. A few days later the dressing was changed and an
ointment was applied. A couple of days later in January 1973
the stitching was removed and the wound was cleansed and
dressed. There is no elaboration as to how the laceration
was sustained. The remainder of the service treatment
records is without reference to the laceration or to any
abnormality involving the Veteran's psychiatric status.
The Veteran claims that he has PTSD stemming from his
experiences in Vietnam. He refers to the nature of his
duties as a perimeter guard and a guard around an ammunition
dump. He states he also loaded body bags. He claims that
the ammunition dumps at Bien Hoa Air Base sustained daily
mortar and rocket attacks.
Attempts at corroborating his recollections of experiences in
Vietnam have not been successful. Accordingly, the Board
must rely on the evidence that is of record. That evidence
includes service personnel records indicating the Veteran was
a participant in operations with the 1st Marine Air Wing in
Vietnam in 1972 and 1973. The Veteran has reported
involvement in combat operations. The Board sees no reason
to disagree with this assertion, particularly in light of the
notation of the Veteran's participation in operations, albeit
not specific in nature, in Vietnam.
The record reveals varying psychiatric diagnoses, but the
principal psychiatric diagnosis is PTSD. The Veteran has
been seen at various times in the past several years for
psychiatric treatment purposes and a number of health care
personnel have given him a diagnosis of PTSD. After a review
of the record, the Board finds that service connection for
PTSD is reasonably warranted. The Board concludes that the
Veteran's personnel records are sufficient to verify his
participation in combat operations while serving with the
Marine Corps in Vietnam in 1972 and 1973. The Board finds
that the Veteran's experiences in Vietnam led to his
diagnosis of PTSD in the past few years. As such, the Board
finds that the claim should be granted.
ORDER
Service connection for PTSD is granted.
____________________________________________
V. L. JORDAN
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Department of Veterans Affairs